On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 07:36 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Martin Pitt [2012-09-09 13:50 +0200]:
> > Hm, interesting case. As it has to be smaller than the backports
> > versions but bigger than squeeze-security's, I don't see other options
> > than keeping wheezy up to date with new upstream versions
Hello again,
Martin Pitt [2012-09-09 13:50 +0200]:
> > Not sure how we can keep the versions properly sorted, short of always
> > also updating 8.4 in wheezy. We'll think about that. Martin?
>
> Hm, interesting case. As it has to be smaller than the backports
> versions but bigger than squeeze-se
Christoph Berg [2012-09-08 22:41 +0200]:
> Re: Adam D. Barratt 2012-09-08
> <1347135924.8753.72.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
> > Often this is achieved by ftp-master copying the packages "upwards"
> > during the point release. My understanding is that this would be
> > unwelcome in this
Re: Adam D. Barratt 2012-09-08
<1347135924.8753.72.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
> Often this is achieved by ftp-master copying the packages "upwards"
> during the point release. My understanding is that this would be
> unwelcome in this case, as it would re-introduce a number of binary
>
Hi,
I mentioned this briefly on IRC a few days ago but mail's easier to
track, particularly when there's several parties involved.
The recent postgresql-8.4 stable-security release has a version number
which is higher than the packages currently in sid/wheezy. In order to
include those packages
5 matches
Mail list logo
